Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Kristopher C. Edwards v. A. Lamarque, Warden

Kristopher C. Edwards v. A. Lamarque, Warden, 455 F.3d 973 (9th Cir. 2006)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 2006-07-19
Topic: bankruptcy

ORDER Upon the vote of a majority of nonre-cused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Kristopher C. Edwards v. A. Lamarque, Warden. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 3 opinions

EDWARDS v. LAMARQUE,455 F.3d 973(9th Cir. 2006)

Kristopher C. EDWARDS, Petitioner-Appellee, v. A. LAMARQUE, Warden,

Respondent-Appellant.

No. 04-55752.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

July 19, 2006.

Kristopher C. Edwards, Soledad, CA, pro se.

Steven S. Lubliner, Esq., Law Offices of Steven S. Lubliner, Petaluma, CA, David Christopher Cook, Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellant.

Before MARY M. SCHROEDER, Chief Judge.

ORDER

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.